Lecture on the Miller case : a foreign perspective

Abstract

I would like to tackle the subject from three different angles : First all the eternal struggle between the Executive and the Judiciary with the former complaining that in breach of the doctrine of the separation of powers the judiciary is intruding into areas which belong exclusively to the Executive The second point is whether the exercise of the prerogative of proroguing Parliament is justiciable, that is to say, subject to court scrutiny and review Thirdly, and perhaps the most important point of all: was this judgment a constitutional one or simply a case of judicial review of administrative action?; and if so , how come that the accountability of the Executive to Parliament, a constitutional convention according to traditional constitutional doctrine, came to be considered as a binding rule annulling a decision of the Government? [extract]